USA
Source: www.cfr.org

As BRICS grows in both membership and global sway, its expansion comes with divisions among its members old and new on how to set the stage for a revised world order.

Summary

• The BRICS group has become a major political force in the last two decades, building on its desire to create a counterweight to Western influence in global institutions.
• The group’s expansion in 2023 exemplifies its growing heft, but also brings new disagreements on issues such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
• Russia’s 2024 leadership could intensify the bloc’s anti-West focus, including attempts to edge out the U.S. dollar—but that will be an uphill battle, experts say.

Introduction

The countries that comprise BRICS—which stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and now five new members—are an informal grouping of emerging economies hoping to increase their sway in the global order. Established in 2009, BRICS was founded on the premise that international institutions were overly dominated by Western powers and had ceased to serve developing countries. The bloc has sought to coordinate its members’ economic and diplomatic policies, found new financial institutions, and reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar.

However, BRICS has struggled with internal divisions on a range of issues, including relations with the United States and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile, its growing membership is both expanding its clout and introducing new tensions. Although some analysts warn that the bloc could undermine the Western-led international order, skeptics say its ambitions to create its own currency and develop a workable alternative to existing institutions face potentially insurmountable challenges.

The coalition is not a formal organization, but rather a loose bloc of non-Western economies that coordinate economic and diplomatic efforts around a shared goal. BRICS countries seek to build an alternative to what they see as the dominance of the Western viewpoint in major multilateral groupings, such as the World Bank, the Group of Seven (G7), and the UN Security Council.

The group’s 2024 expansion comes with a range of geopolitical implications. It represents growing economic and demographic heft: the ten BRICS countries now comprise more than a quarter of the global economy and almost half of the world’s population. The group is poised to exert influence over the wars in the Gaza Strip and Ukraine, the shape of the global economic system, the competition between China and the West, and efforts to transition to clean energy.

Growing membership also brings new challenges, however, including increasing pushback from Western counties and divisions within the bloc. Experts say that how BRICS members navigate those tensions will determine whether the group can become a more unified voice on the global stage.

What are its origins?

The term was originally coined by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill in a 2001 research paper in which he argued that the growth of what was then the “BRIC” countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) was poised to challenge the dominant G7 wealthy economies.

Russia was the first to call a convening of the four countries, a decision analysts say was driven by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s growing desire to create a counterweight to the West. Russia hosted the first official BRIC summit in 2009, and South Africa joined a year later by invitation from China, forming the five-country grouping that would persist for more than a decade.

The next wave of expansion came at the 2023 BRICS summit, with invitations extended to six newcomers: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). All accepted except Argentina, after its newly elected President Javier Milei pledged to turn the country in a pro-West direction, saying that it would not “ally with communists.” Saudi Arabia has reportedly accepted the membership, but has delayed officially joining without giving detailed further explanation.

What does BRICS do?

The BRICS heads of state convene annually, with each country taking a one-year chairmanship to set priorities and host a summit. The bloc relies on consensus-based decision-making and is largely informal: it has no defining charter, secretariat, or common funds.

A few thematic areas underscore its priorities:

Advocate for greater representation in global organizations. BRICS seeks to establish a united front of emerging economy perspectives in multilateral institutions. The group aims both to push for reform of existing institutions, such as expanding the UN Security Council, and to form negotiating blocs within those institutions. For instance, many BRICS countries opposed the UN condemnation of Russia’s war in Ukraine and have sought common positions on the Iran nuclear program and conflicts in Afghanistan, Gaza, Libya, and Syria.

Coordinate economic policy. The 2008 global recession hit the BRICS countries hard, leading the group to emphasize economic coordination on issues such as tariff policy, export restrictions of critical resources, and investment. The bloc’s annual foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows more than quadrupled from 2001 to 2021, though they have slowed in recent years.

Reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar. Increasingly disgruntled over the domination of the dollar in global transactions, which exposes them to Western sanctions, BRICS leaders have long advocated for de-dollarization in favor of increased trade in local currencies or even a potential common BRICS currency.

Create an alternative finance system. The group’s New Development Bank (NDB) and Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) are meant to mimic the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF), respectively. BRICS members hope that alternative lending institutions can invigorate South-South cooperation and reduce dependence on traditional funding sources.

How effective have the BRICS financial institutions been?

The NDB and the CRA were designed as an alternative to the so-called Bretton Woods arrangement, the mainstream global financial system founded by leading industrial countries in the aftermath of World War II. Many countries of the Global South believe those institutions, especially the World Bank and the IMF, are failing to meet the needs of poorer nations, especially in areas such as climate financing.

“This system was created by rich countries to benefit rich countries,” UN Secretary-General António Guterres has argued. “Practically no African country was sitting at the table of the Bretton Woods Agreement.”

The two institutions operate in different ways. The CRA, a common fund among the BRICS central banks that offers support during a currency crisis, is limited to BRICS countries, while in 2021 the NDB opened to private projects in other emerging-market countries.

The NDB offers loans, guarantees, and other financial mechanisms to support private projects that contribute to sustainable development and building out infrastructure. It is intended to offer more flexibility, greater equality among shareholders, and easier access to funds than the World Bank, which must share its attention across 190 members. Its lending focuses on clean energy, transportation, sanitation, and social development, and it has sought to devote 40 percent of its projects to tackling climate change. To date, the bank has approved more than $32 billion for ninety-six projects since operations began in 2016.

However, those efforts face roadblocks. The NDB is more than five times [PDF] smaller than the World Bank, and experts doubt it could completely replace it. Others contend that its ambitions to redesign the global financial system have fallen short as it maintains many of the practices of its competitors. It has also faced criticism for vague commitments on environmental and social impact standards.

Can a BRICS currency replace the dollar?

The BRICS countries have sought to reduce the primacy of the U.S. dollar in international trade for more than a decade, primarily by increasing the use of their own currencies for trading, especially China’s renminbi. There is also a push to introduce a new, BRICS-wide currency, of which Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is a major proponent. Other monetary proposals laid out at the 2023 summit included founding a new cryptocurrency or using a combined basket of BRICS currencies.

Skeptics say those ambitions are far from reach, however. A BRICS currency would require major political compromises, including a banking union, a fiscal union, and general macroeconomic convergence. The dollar, long the world’s principal reserve currency, is still used in more than 80 percent of global trade, and many experts doubt that a new BRICS reserve currency would be stable or reliable enough to be widely trusted for global transactions.

What has divided BRICS members?

According to experts, in addition to those challenges implementing their economic vision, the BRICS countries also face increasing internal tensions and rivalry among members. China and India have seen tensions rise over their decades-old border dispute as well as their growing competition for economic and geopolitical leadership of the Global South. The group has already had problems in making decisions; at a foreign ministers’ meeting in New York in September, leaders sought to propose a model for streamlining new additions to the UN Security Council, but the group could not muster an agreement.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has also deepened fissures. It sparked widespread condemnation, Western-led sanctions, and diplomatic pressure to stop trading with Russia, disconcerting its BRICS allies. An International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for Putin’s arrest over war crimes allegedly committed by Russian forces in Ukraine complicated the 2023 BRICS forum, forcing Putin to stay home or risk arrest by ICC member South Africa. Most BRICS members have sought a middle ground, while other members have largely ignored Western sanctions. Some analysts argue the sanctions on oil and other necessities are in fact pushing the BRICS countries closer together.
Meanwhile, economic and political instability in member countries has also shaken confidence in BRICS efforts. In the past decade, Brazil and South Africa have faced collapsing state capacity, yearslong recessions, chronic corruption, and crumbling infrastructure. China’s economic slump also threatens the group’s dynamism. Other major dividing lines include tensions between democracies and autocracies and long-standing rivalries such as those between Saudi Arabia and Iran and between Egypt and Ethiopia.

Why the expansion?

The push to grow membership is another fault line in the bloc. China and Russia have favored expansion, while Brazil and India were more hesitant, concerned it would dilute their own influence. India’s growing rivalry with China further fueled the desire not to prop up China’s power with a larger group in Beijing’s orbit.

The addition of Egypt and Ethiopia will amplify voices from the African continent. Egypt also had close commercial ties with China and India, and political ties with Russia; as a new BRICS member, Egypt seeks to attract more investment and improve its battered economy. China has long courted Ethiopia, the third-biggest economy in sub-Saharan Africa, with billions of dollars of investment to make the country a hub of its Belt and Road Initiative.

The addition of Saudi Arabia and the UAE would bring in the two biggest economies in the Arab world and the second and eighth top oil producers globally. They also play mediation roles in other regions, with Saudi Arabia leading ongoing peace talks for Sudan’s civil war and the war in Ukraine, the UAE hosting India-Pakistan stability talks, and both countries considering normalizing relations with Israel for the first time in decades. However, some experts warn that the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the UAE, in which they have at times supported opposing sides of conflicts, could carry into BRICS. Others say both countries are hoping that BRICS membership will help them focus on economic development.

The new members bring questions, however, over relations with the West. Iran and Russia are staunch adversaries of U.S. influence, while China sees itself as locked in economic and geopolitical competition with the United States. As Iran’s former President Ibrahim Raisi told his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, “Iran’s membership in the bloc is opposition to American unilateralism.” Still, Brazil, India, South Africa have had warmer relations with the United States, and likewise Saudi Arabia and the UAE are its major security partners.

How have Western countries responded?

Western countries have largely downplayed the group’s growth. White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that Washington doesn’t see BRICS as a geopolitical rival, while Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has largely dismissed efforts to move away from the dollar. Similarly, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has downplayed growing ties between BRICS members. Other political analyses claim the BRICS countries’ ambitions are exaggerated, and its members’ domestic headwinds are troubling enough to hamper any real threat to Western economic health.
Still, some European policymakers have cautioned that the anti-West sentiment is growing more confrontational. They see the expansion as the result of a lackluster Western response to low-income countries’ needs. They say Western countries need to begin reforming financial institutions in earnest.
“The accusation that the West is arrogant toward the needs of the Global South is serious. It cannot be answered by offering ‘value-based partnerships’ and a ‘rules-based’ multilateralism when the interest of the BRICS is focused on changing those rules in global finance, trade, and other standard-setting procedures,” writes Günther Maihold, senior fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

Other analysts say the BRICS de-dollarization efforts could eventually undermine the strength of the dollar and thus the health of the U.S. economy. “Ignoring BRICS as a major policy force—something the U.S. has been prone to do in the past—is no longer an option,” argued Tufts University scholars in 2023.

What’s next for BRICS?

Russia holds the rotating BRICS presidency this year and has set out to use its time as chair to focus on establishing a more “fair world order” and steering the pivot to local currencies and payment systems at its October summit in Kazan. The Russia-led BRICS meeting comes as the Kremlin presses on with its third year of war in Ukraine; analysts expect Putin will use the chairmanship to attempt to show Russia has not been isolated by Western pressure.

Despite Russia’s desire to take the bloc in a more strongly anti-West direction, experts say members such as Brazil and India, with closer U.S. ties, will put up resistance. “Nobody in this bloc is willing to put themselves in the position that Russia is currently in, as an open adversary of the West and the United States, risking armed confrontation,” Boris Bondarev, former Russian diplomat to the United Nations, told the Washington Post in 2023.

Other 2024 priorities include integrating new members and establishing a new category of BRICS partner countries that will likely fall short of a full membership.

Meanwhile, BRICS is already looking ahead to further growth. Current members have indicated they seek to bring in more members and partner countries to gain access to other regional trade blocs. The group opening its doors is attracting BRICS hopefuls: more than forty countries have expressed interest in joining, and at least twenty reportedly applied to join after the 2023 summit expansion.

Russia
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Malaysia will increase its freedom of :diplomatic maneuvering: and its role in world affairs after becoming BRICS partner, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko told reporters.
"It will have the opportunity to expand the freedom of its diplomatic maneuvering and thus increase its role in world affairs," he said, answering a question from TASS on Malaysia's cooperation with BRICS.

Rudenko noted that BRICS is an organization with a very broad mandate and a large number of participants covering all regions of the world. "Moreover, BRICS is one of the pillars of the emerging multipolar world order," he added.

Earlier, Malaysian Ambassador to Moscow Cheong Loon Lai told TASS that the country has agreed to become a partner of the association.

Russia
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Thailand is happy to have received an invitation to join BRICS as a partner country and it will be seeking a full membership in the grouping, the spokesman for the kingdom’s Foreign Ministry, Nikondet Phalangkun, told TASS.

"We have not yet given an official response as certain internal procedures have yet to take place. But, of course, we are happy to have been invited to become a partner state of BRICS," the Thai diplomat said. "As you know, Thailand expects to become a full member of BRICS as soon as possible. This is our goal," he added.

A diplomat told TASS in November that Thailand had received an invitation to join BRICS as a partner country.

The BRICS group was founded in 2006 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, with South Africa joining it in 2011. On January 1, 2024, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates also became members.

USA
Source: www.eurasiareview.com

As Southeast Asia’s largest economy, Indonesia has made significant advancements in both economic and geopolitical stature, prompting discussions about its potential membership in influential international organizations such as BRICS and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The BRIC grouping, which includes Brazil, Russia, India, and China, and has been expanded to BRICS with the addition of South Africa, comprises emerging economies that challenge traditional global powers. In contrast, the OECD is a forum for high-income economies to coordinate policies and promote sustainable growth. Membership in these organizations could solidify Indonesia’s status as a global economic powerhouse; however, the journey is not without its challenges, including domestic governance issues, economic inequality, and environmental sustainability. This essay analyzes Indonesia’s candidacy by assessing its economic potential, social progress, and the obstacles it must overcome while offering recommendations to enhance its global integration.

Indonesia’s Economic Potential and Case for BRICS Membership

Indonesia’s economic trajectory makes it a prime candidate for BRICS membership. As of 2024, the country’s gross domestic product (GDP) is projected to reach $1.43 trillion, ranking it as the world’s 16th largest economy and the largest in Southeast Asia. The nation has consistently experienced GDP growth of 5-6% annually, fueled by domestic consumption, a burgeoning digital economy valued at $77 billion, and abundant natural resources such as coal, palm oil, and nickel—crucial elements in the global supply chain for renewable energy technologies like electric vehicles.

Geopolitically, Indonesia’s strategic location at the crossroads of the Indian and Pacific Oceans allows it to control vital maritime trade routes. As a founding member of ASEAN and an active participant in the G20, Indonesia has demonstrated its capability to navigate complex multilateral frameworks. Including Indonesia in BRICS would enhance the group’s legitimacy as a representative of the Global South, fostering cooperation among emerging economies.

Nevertheless, challenges persist. Indonesia’s economy, while robust, is significantly smaller than those of BRICS heavyweights like China and India, whose GDPs exceed $14 trillion and $3.7 trillion, respectively. Additionally, BRIC’s occasionally anti-Western rhetoric may conflict with Indonesia’s non-aligned foreign policy, which seeks to maintain balanced relations with both Western powers and the Global South.

Indonesia’s Social Progress and OECD Membership Aspiration

Indonesia’s aspirations for OECD membership demonstrate its commitment to aligning with global standards for economic and social development. Under President Joko Widodo (Jokowi), recent reforms have focused on enhancing the business environment, notably through the landmark Omnibus Law on Job Creation (2020), which streamlined regulations and increased foreign investment.

The ongoing construction of the new capital city, Nusantara, further exemplifies Indonesia’s modernization efforts. Social indicators reflect this progress as well—literacy rates have risen to 96%, and the proportion of the population living below the poverty line has dropped to 8.5% in 2024. Indonesia is also committed to sustainability, pledging to achieve net-zero emissions by 2060, backed by a growing renewable energy sector.

However, significant challenges remain on the path to OECD membership. Governance issues persist, as evidenced by Transparency International ranking Indonesia 96th in its 2024 Corruption Perception Index. Income inequality is another concern, with a Gini index of 38.2 indicating a considerable wealth gap. Furthermore, while Indonesia has made progress in renewable energy, issues such as deforestation and reliance on coal-fired power plants undermine its environmental credentials. These challenges highlight the necessity for structural reforms to meet the OECD’s rigorous policy standards.

Problems and Challenges in Global Integration

Indonesia’s integration into BRICS and OECD is fraught with obstacles. Domestically, infrastructure gaps continue to exist despite significant investment. Rapid development in urban centers like Jakarta contrasts with the underdevelopment of rural areas, limiting equitable growth. Disparities in education further impede human capital development, with access to quality education skewed in favor of urban populations. Politically, it is essential for Indonesia to ensure the continuity of economic reforms, such as infrastructure development and investment-friendly regulations, alongside a stable foreign policy framework to advance its global integration aspiration.

On the international stage, Indonesia faces a delicate balancing act. While BRICS membership could bolster its influence in the Global South, aligning with the bloc’s anti-Western stance may strain relations with Western partners. Conversely, joining the OECD may necessitate Indonesia adopting policies that challenge its current economic model, including stricter labor standards and a reduced reliance on resource-based industries.

Environmental challenges are significant. Indonesia’s deforestation rate, largely driven by palm oil production, is among the highest in the world, leading to biodiversity loss and increased carbon emissions. Meeting the environmental expectations of the OECD and BRICS will necessitate a shift towards sustainable agricultural practices and considerable investment in clean energy.

Benefits of Membership in BRICS and OECD

Joining BRICS and OECD presents Indonesia with substantial advantages. Economically, BRICS membership would grant access to development funding and technological cooperation, particularly in infrastructure and renewable energy. It would also strengthen Indonesia’s bargaining power in global trade negotiations, providing a more influential voice in shaping international commerce.
OECD membership would enhance Indonesia’s reputation as a reform-oriented economy, attracting increased foreign direct investment. The OECD’s policy frameworks could serve as a model for improving governance, education, and environmental sustainability, aligning Indonesia with best practices in these areas.

Geopolitically, membership in both organizations would reinforce Indonesia’s role as a bridge between developed and developing nations. As a member of BRICS, Indonesia could advocate for the interests of the Global South, while OECD membership would affirm its status among leading economies, enhancing its diplomatic influence.

Recommendations

To optimize its chances of successful integration, Indonesia should prioritize the following actions:

• Strengthen Governance: Enhance transparency and reduce corruption through the digitalization of public services and stricter enforcement of anti-corruption laws.
• Address Inequality : Expand social welfare programs and invest in rural development to mitigate wealth disparities and improve access to education.
• Accelerate Environmental Reforms: Implement stricter controls on deforestation, promote reforestation efforts, and expedite the transition from coal to renewable energy sources.
• Maintain Policy Continuity: Ensure that ongoing economic reforms and infrastructure projects remain stable and consistent.
• Engage in Multilateral Diplomacy: Balance relationships with both Western and non-Western blocs to uphold Indonesia’s non-aligned foreign policy stance.

Conclusion

Indonesia’s pursuit of BRICS and OECD membership reflects its ambition to evolve from a regional leader into a global powerhouse. With a robust economy, a strategic geopolitical position, and ongoing reforms, Indonesia has the potential to make significant contributions to both organizations. However, challenges such as governance issues, inequality, and environmental sustainability must be addressed to ensure successful integration. By prioritizing structural reforms, equitable development, and sustainable policies, Indonesia can meet the expectations of BRICS and OECD while setting a precedent for other emerging economies seeking global recognition.

The opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own.

References

• O’Neill, Jim. The Growth Map: Economic Opportunity in the BRICs and Beyond. Penguin Books, 2011.
•  Soesastro, Hadi, and Mubyarto. The Indonesian Economy: Entering a New Era. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2005.
•  Hill, Hal, and Siwage Dharma Negara. Indonesia’s Economy in the New World: Crafting a New Narrative. ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, 2020.

India
Source: moderndiplomacy.eu


At present BRICS countries account for 35 percent of the global economy. This is higher than the 30 percent share of developed countries in recent months.

The first meeting of leaders of the ‘BRIC’ alliance of Brazil, Russia, India, and China was held in Russia in 2009. Then in 2011, it became a five-nation confederation with the addition of South Africa. Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia and the United Arab Emirates also joined at the recent summit in Russia. Many more countries have expressed their desire to join the block. It cannot be said that it is a formal block. The BRICS conglomerate can be said to be moving towards a goal of coordinating economic and diplomatic efforts to create an alternative to the Western G7, the United Nations Security Council and the World Bank.

At present BRICS countries account for 35 percent of the global economy. This is higher than the 30 percent share of developed countries in recent months. China’s share of world exports was 14.2% in 2023 and India’s share 1.8%. In the same year, China’s exported goods were worth US$ 117 billion to India. But by 2023, India’s exports were only US$ 16.25 billion. India’s exports to Russia in FY 2023-24 were US$ 61.44 billion. India’s imports from the US in 2023 were US$ 40.12 billion. In the same year, India’s exports to the US were worth US$ 75.81 billion. The US is now India’s top trading partner, overtaking China. By this we can understand what kind of partners the US, China and Russia are.

Under the shadow of the aforementioned complicated trade relations amongst BRICS nations and US, the three years of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war, Iran’s stance on attaining nuclear weapons, a yearlong Israeli-Hamas war, threatening climate change issues, and Donald Trump’s US presidential election success, the BRICS summit was held in Kazan the city of Russia in October 2024 this year. BRICS leaders and newly joined members successfully participated, to the disappointment of others, especially the US. For, in these circumstances, it has been projected that Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping have isolated the West, making global headlines.

This is not to say that the organization lacks the appreciation and support of many countries for raising up strong leadership under the BRICS umbrella to challenge America’s global leadership. This is definitely positive for Russia and China. However, India’s positioning itself as a neutral country here. This situation should be seen as a leverage for India, since India has very deep ties with the US and Russia. Putin is secretly helping in various ways to improve India – China relations, India and China are now cautiously calculating moves to renew their friendship; India cannot endanger friendship with any of these nations. It must also not be forgotten that this move was particularly important after the BRICS summit at Kazan, when China and India mutually agreed to amicably resume their traditional patrolling points in the Line of Actual Control (LoC). Putin seems to have succeeded in this.

In this context, the purpose of the consultation held at the Kazan conference in seeking to replace the US dollar with a unified BRICS currency or to enact business in another currency is a warning for Washington. Brazilian President Luiz Lula de Silva first proposed a separate currency for Latin American countries to trade independently of the US in 2023 at a regional conference of Latin American countries. Consequently, at the BRICS conference held in Johannesburg, South Africa in August 2023, the President of Brazil requested a common currency for BRICS trade.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump, who eventually won a second term as president, accused the US President Joe Biden’s administration during the ongoing US election campaign for playing mute during the last two years of BRICS currency discussions. Trump has warned that he will not tolerate BRICS policy as President.

Following his victory, Donald Trump, who will take office as President of the United States in January 2025, was busy in selecting cabinet choices for the important portfolios from his pool of supporters. Then, suddenly, without any discussion, he issued a stern warning on social media against BRICS countries, causing a huge shock across the world. He warned, “BRICS countries would be taxed 100% if they tried to introduce a new currency to replace the US dollar. BRICS leaders should give the US a commitment not to introduce a new currency to replace the dollar. If not, we will have to say goodbye to the US market.”

Donald Trump’s frustration is understandable. How could he not realize that the creation of a new currency to replace the dollar would certainly destroy the US economy? Putin diagnoses the problem of the US dollar as a weapon of sanction. Although India is not against the US dollar, Putin reckons that this aggressive US use of the dollar means that India has no choice but to find a new way to do the trade.

In the meantime, it is China who is looking to gain much from these troubled waters. China hopes to take advantage of this situation to curb America’s international power. Chinese leaders have been encouraged to propose their own currency for BRICS internal trade. Russia observes this development closely, whilst India is reluctant. Nevertheless, the strongest voice of this BRICS-currency movement is Russia’s attempt to do business outwith the US’s sanctions associated with Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Amidst the soaring US external debt, domestic challenges and political turmoil, around 58.36% of the world’s foreign currency reserves are in the US dollar. The US dollar is undeniably a focal point in world trade. Relatedly, the US keeps the Euro as its reserve currency. Therefore, it is not easy for BRICS countries to create a new currency. Trump knows that there is no imminent threat.

Simultaneously, the United States cannot reduce its trade deficit gap and increase its global dominance. Therefore, Trump’s warning appears to be an anticipatory move to get other countries to do what he thinks upon taking office in January. Yet, Trump’s global economic landscape shows growing tensions as the US grapples with challenges to its financial dominance. Further, when the United States imposes high taxes, it is the Americans who suffer the most.
India would like to sustain a balanced foreign policy and knows the impact of the potential BRICS currency. India may support a new currency for BRICS in principle. Still, it cannot abandon its important US trading partner. There is no immediate possibility of a BRICS currency nor of a rapid decline in American dominance. So de-dollarisation of the US Dollar should not be part of India’s economic policy nor of our politics or diplomacy.

USA
Source: news.bitcoin.com


BRICS nations brace for a global economic standoff as U.S. tariff threats spark concerns about trade retaliation and geopolitical tensions, reshaping international alliances.

BRICS Retaliation Inevitable: Expert Predicts Clash Over US Tariffs

BRICS countries are expected to retaliate with countermeasures if the U.S. imposes a 100% customs duty on goods from member states, Tass reported, citing Shakila Yacob, a professor at the Jeffrey Cheah Institute on Southeast Asia at Sunway University in Malaysia. Speaking at the Valdai International Discussion Club’s 15th Asian Conference in Kuala Lumpur on Dec. 9, she warned:

Of course, this will simply result in other countries responding with their countermeasures.
Yacob emphasized the likely consequences of such a policy, stating: “If Trump indeed imposes 100% duties, it will lead to countermeasures.”

The conference, which runs from Dec. 9-10 in Kuala Lumpur, is a platform for discussing regional and global issues, including the evolving economic and geopolitical role of alliances like BRICS. Organized in partnership with Malaysia’s Bait Al Amanah Foundation, Japan’s Sasakawa Peace Foundation, and Malaysia’s Institute for Strategic Analysis and Policy Research (INSAP), the event brings together experts to analyze the implications of protectionist policies and their impact on international trade and regional stability.

The professor expressed concerns about the broader economic impact of such measures, particularly on global trade dynamics. She noted the importance of Southeast Asia in this scenario. She noted:
We are concerned about the influence that it will have on the global economy, which is why it is important for Southeast Asia to join BRICS.

Her remarks followed a proposal by U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, who suggested the steep tariffs as a reaction to any move by BRICS members to move away from the U.S. dollar in international trade.

Many people have reacted to Trump’s threat regarding BRICS tariffs. China has strongly defended the BRICS coalition against the tariff threats, emphasizing its principles of openness and inclusiveness. French economist Jacques Sapir has warned that 100% tariffs on BRICS imports could double U.S. prices for essentials and accelerate a global shift away from the dollar. Duvvuri Subbarao, former Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, questioned whether U.S. laws allow sanctions based solely on shifting away from the dollar.